<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (5) TMI 313 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78596</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s. Sudhakar Plastic Ltd., setting aside the impugned order due to the lack of specific allegations in the show-cause notice, the incorrect application of provisions, and the unjustified penalties imposed. The demand notice issued beyond the one-year period was held to be barred by limitation, penalties were deemed unjustified, and the order was unsustainable beyond the show-cause notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 14:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116713" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 313 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78596</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s. Sudhakar Plastic Ltd., setting aside the impugned order due to the lack of specific allegations in the show-cause notice, the incorrect application of provisions, and the unjustified penalties imposed. The demand notice issued beyond the one-year period was held to be barred by limitation, penalties were deemed unjustified, and the order was unsustainable beyond the show-cause notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78596</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>